I start out reading the article sympathizing, even though i am often sympathetic to MRAs, with the writer as this group seems to have made a very bad choice in their mode of protest. I think, like most people with hearts and brains would think that there may very well be reason for them to protest, rape is one of the oldest political weapons in use (see: racism in the south or pretty much anywhere or recent campaigns to deny great numbers of men custody of their children or acces to traditionally female jobs), but i imagine the possible actual victim of rape who tries to acces a helpline and can’t get through and get a very bad taste in my mouth.

After having established this initial sympathy the writer then quickly demolishes it by turning her reflection in to ansympathetic and rather stereotypical rant putting her self on exactly the same level as the more idiotic MRAs.

A few years ago on a Swedish television debate (i’m swedish) a member of the “feminist initiative” party stood up and said men who claimed to be victims of physical abuse in relationships (a very well documented phenomena which is not unusual) were just pathetic assholes who tried to take even the suffering role away from women. The sadest part of this was that noone reacted, my usually eloquent feminist friends didn’t see any need to rebuke her, i didn’t see her normally very verbal partycomrades issue any apology to the men who are beaten and in some instances killed by their spouses every year….

Perhaps princess Phd here would have stood up for those victims of abuse in a similar fashion to how she stands up against MRAs, my prejudice based on long experience tells me she would just have found a way of “understanding the feminist correctly”.

I really don’t see what this has to do with maleness and femaleness at all.

It’s frankly depressing that “haha, male tears” is a message that actual people want to hear. What are you, twelve?

The MO of biased sociology today….

I’d check the basic facts before making a statement like that. It IS possible to operationalize, because it has been, for decades an in almost every single country in the world. To say that privilege isn’t scientific is a filthy lie, seing as it has been pinned down by concrete data in just about every subject out there, not just gender studies, but in medicine, economics, political science and what have you.

You’re on a sociology blog. Trying to take down an established field based on your own speculation about what is or isn’t true might be allright on 4chan, but here it’s just embarrassing.

From the OP:
“[Men are] angry that “women are being listened to… They’re mad because they’re not the only ones that matter anymore.”

Oh, so your answer is like Ethan Couch’s defense, where the response to someone with “affluenza”, or a lifetime of not being accountable for his actions, is to not hold him accountable for his actions. The response to some guy whimpering about not being listened to more than anyone else, about not having everything be about them all the time, including the women’s movement, ffs, is to listen more to men?

Yes, there are problems with Oxy’s anonymous reporting system; the main problem being that it may not be anonymous.

As for every other comment about Oxy on this thread, the rest of this blog, the LA Times, etc: Are any other Oxy-related people (students, staff, parents, alumni, etc) sick of everyone else’s uninformed opinions about our school? PLEASE speak up for injustices for causes that the Oxy family is standing up for and PLEASE stop trying to pretend that all of our problems are either made up or easily fixable.

Rant over, Love ya Dr. Wade!

Probably, but it’s an argument that is potentially orthogonal to the entire debate, because there is no way to prove whether said thing ever existed in the first place. It is an invented unit that is now allegedly taken away which is supposed to cause all the problems. That is not a very scientific approach to anything. Privilege, as used in common and potentially academic feminism, is something that defies definition and hence is impossible to opertationlise. It may work on an individual level, it may even be useful to check one’s privilege, but as an explanation for something like the case at hand it entirely useless. There is simply no privilege-based way to determine if opposition to any change is a result of actual discrimination or a result of perceived discrimination. Sometimes, as feminism explains, those can even be the same.

IF feminism listened more to men’s concerns instead of mocking them as forth-graders there would probably be less reason to be as concerned as some appear to be about the fact that feminism is the thought leader in the gender debate. When fear of false alligations is described as paranoia while most feminists will claim that a woman’s fear to walk in the dark in front of a man is entirely reasonable, there’s simply not a lot, I think, to convince men to trust feminists.

I’ll start trusting feminists in this respect when they treat alleged perpetrators fairly, and I’ll start trusting MRAs when they start treating alleged victims fairly. And of course, the usual disclaimer – it’s not all about men allegedly raping women.